# Global Free Trade **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 8, 2001, 2:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-free-trade/75391 "2001-08-08T02:00:20Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![London\_Calling](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/49beb7/32.png) [@London\_Calling](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/London_Calling)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2001, 4:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-free-trade/75391/21 "2001-08-13T16:36:22Z")
I do feel uncomfortable with characterising this issue as being anti “free market” because, as I understand it, that implies (amongst other things) that one is, by definition, pro trade tariffs and perhaps ultimately, even anti-capitalist. That is simply not the case. In fact, if the US media and or politicians _are_ using the phrase “against the free market” it seems to me to be not dissimilar to characterising the heath care model favoured (in various ways) by the rest of the developed world as “socialised” (or ‘socialized’, if you will)– it simply implies something that is not accurate. In other words, It’s just the old trick of tainting something by (inaccurate) association …(we’ve had this conversation before but, in essence, if pooling resources to provide a cost-effective national service is ‘socialised’ then why is the US education system not also characterised in the same way – seems curious that US politicians would expose the nations children to 12 years of ‘socialised’ education ?). To characterise an alternative health care model in terms that associates it with something not economically effective is pure propaganda. But it also means Corporations have a better chance of retaining control of the health care industry. ‘Globalisation’ is more concerned with ensuring Capitalism works _for us_ by providing wealth within a wholly democratic framework rather than us working for unfettered, socially unconscionable, ‘global village’ Capitalism. That’s the game now; IHMHO: to prevent Corporations influencing / levering politicians and Governments to make decisions that favour them \*at a cost \* to a society whether that be on legislation re: working hours, the building of a huge plant in a deprived area, ‘acceptable’ levels of Corporation tax or one of the hundreds of other associated issues. ---
**Author:** ![sailor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a587f6/32.png) [@sailor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sailor)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2001, 5:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-free-trade/75391/22 "2001-08-13T17:42:29Z")
kabbes, if matt was trying to say what you are saying, he did not do a very good job. Of course, nobody is in favor of pollution but even pollution is a global issue which has to be dealt with globally. As I say, when I read what matt says I just cannot interpret it to mean what you are saying. \>\> It \ is a directionless force whose results are the average of millions of self-interested decisions, which means that it is unconscious That is what I am refering to and I think it is nonsense. You could say the same thing about political elections. The free market is a system of permanent and continuing elections. I _like_ to have my freedom to vote with my money for the products I consider best suit my needs. I cannot see how environmental regulations (or labor regulations or any other regulations) have anything to do with this. \>\> the protesters don’t want to let any stinking bureaucrats decide how they need to make their protest known… We have a system of laws which were enacted by the elected representatives of the people. What these people are doing is illegal. Are you trying to tell me it is OK to break the law when you see fit? Then I guess it is OK for the police to bust a few skulls. I’ll go for that. Give the police free rein and see who wins. If protestors want “global corporations” to respect the laws, the first thing they should do is respect the laws themselves. ---
**Author:** ![erislover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/71e660/32.png) [@erislover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/erislover)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2001, 6:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-free-trade/75391/23 "2001-08-13T18:14:55Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by London\_Calling \* > In fact, if the US media and or politicians _are_ using the phrase “against the free market” it seems to me to be not dissimilar to characterising the heath care model favoured (in various ways) by the rest of the developed world as “socialised” (or ‘socialized’, if you will)– it simply implies something that is not accurate. In other words, It’s just the old trick of tainting something by (inaccurate) association… Er… what exactly is it if not socialized? I’m sorry, i’ve always felt that term applied to it almost perfectly. As far as being “anti free market” the only people who are truly supporting a free market are anarchists. Everyone else wants a regulated economy in some way, shape, or form. ---
**Author:** ![matt\_mcl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ab992/32.png) [@matt\_mcl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/matt_mcl)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2001, 10:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-free-trade/75391/24 "2001-08-13T22:00:12Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by sailor \* > \*\*We have a system of laws which were enacted by the elected representatives of the people. What these people are doing is illegal. \*\* Who? You seem to be under the impression that exercising peaceful protest is a crime (punishable by physical and chemical assault without trial) if it is carried out within the same area code as some people breaking windows. If so, let me disabuse you. ---
**Author:** ![sailor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a587f6/32.png) [@sailor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sailor)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2001, 11:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-free-trade/75391/25 "2001-08-13T23:34:52Z")
\>\> You seem to be under the impression that exercising peaceful protest is a crime (punishable by physical and chemical assault without trial) if it is carried out within the same area code as some people breaking windows. If so, let me disabuse you. Nope, it is not a crime but it _is_ pretty stupid and not likely to get you much sympathy. You also have a right to walk the streets in NYC with a million dollars in your hand. It is still pretty stupid. I have said it before: to say “it is just a minority being violent and don’t blame us” is very disingenous. All other groups manage to demonstrate without the violence and generally do not have problems with their demonstrations. The scenes I have seen in the news were of police reacting against people who were being violent so dont give me this shit that they are beating up peaceful people who were meditating. The guy who got killed in Italy had it coming for being an idiot. You go throwing big metal objects against people who are armed with guns you are bound to get shot. That’ll teach him. ---
**Author:** ![matt\_mcl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ab992/32.png) [@matt\_mcl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/matt_mcl)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2001, 3:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-free-trade/75391/26 "2001-08-14T03:59:37Z")
_struggles to contain himself_ “The scenes I have seen in the news were of police reacting against people who were being violent so dont give me this shit that they are beating up peaceful people who were meditating.” Perhaps you should watch something other than CNN, dear. When I was in Quebec City, I spent the entire time there in the company of hundreds and hundreds of people behaving in a totally pacific manner who were nonetheless attacked with chemical and physical force. Newspapers in Europe have recently been full of wrenching stories of people from civil society groups who weren’t even out protesting when their convergence centre was invaded by police who beat the shit out of everyone that moved, then arrested them without charge and tortured them in prison. ( [http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4228452,00.html](http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4228452,00.html) ) Democratic expression by non-violent manifestation has a very long history as a means of expression. It is not supposed to involve risks of this sort, and if it does, the solution seems to me to restrain the police, not the protesters. I’m not going to stop protesting because I’m threatened in this way, and if somebody takes it upon themselves to beat me up when I’m peacefully protesting I **am** going to make my réplique by every method society places at my disposal. ---
**Author:** ![sailor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a587f6/32.png) [@sailor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sailor)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2001, 4:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-free-trade/75391/27 "2001-08-14T04:59:03Z")
So, you are telling me this is a worldwide conspiracy against these peaceful demonstrators. Every country, every city they go, they have a problem. Yet plenty of other groups everywhere seem to make their points peacefully and without problems. Washington DC has seen much bigger deonstrations that go without incident and yet every time your crowd comes to town we have to brace ourselves for the worst. And what’s wrong with CNN, Newsweek, The Washington Post, etc? Are you telling me the images are doctored? Are you telling me what I saw on TV never happened? You know, _if_ these people have problems everywhere they go and _if_ the only way they can get people’s attention is by using violence, then maybe they should think it is them and not the rest of the world who has a problem. Using the word “peaceful” to describe these demonstrations is disingenous. They come looking to create trouble and disruption and they know it. As far as I am concerned the police are doing their job. ---
**Author:** ![matt\_mcl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ab992/32.png) [@matt\_mcl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/matt_mcl)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2001, 5:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-free-trade/75391/28 "2001-08-14T05:07:19Z")
> [@](#): > > And what’s wrong with CNN, Newsweek, The Washington Post, etc? Are you telling me the images are doctored? Are you telling me what I saw on TV never happened? No, I’m suggesting that they’re not the whole story, especially in view of my experiences and the experiences of others that put the lie to the idea that all or even a substatial minority of protestors are violent and that police responses so far have been warranted. Gee, I wonder what incentive large corporations might have to discredit people protesting against their hegemony. > [@](#): > > You know, _if_ these people have problems everywhere they go and _if_ the only way they can get people’s attention is by using violence, then maybe they should think it is them and not the rest of the world who has a problem. Great, I’ll pass the message on. In the mean time, do you have anything to say to me and to that very large majority of us who are interested in more than a street fight? > [@](#): > > Using the word “peaceful” to describe these demonstrations is disingenous. They come looking to create trouble and disruption and they know it. As far as I am concerned the police are doing their job. What I know is that I learned the difference between _some_ and _all_ very early in life. Perhaps you should look into it. ---
**Author:** ![kabbes](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/e99b99/32.png) [@kabbes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kabbes)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2001, 8:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-free-trade/75391/29 "2001-08-14T08:45:20Z")
There’s no _way_ I’m heading back into a socialised medicine debate! > [@](#): > > _Posted by matt_ > > **\>\> It \ is a directionless force whose results are the average of millions of self-interested decisions, which means that it is unconscious** > [@](#): > > _Posted by sailor_ > > \*\*That is what I am refering to and I think it is nonsense. You could say the same thing about political elections. The free market is a system of permanent and continuing elections. I _like_ to have my freedom to vote with my money for the products I consider best suit my needs. > > I cannot see how environmental regulations (or labor regulations or any other regulations) have anything to do with this.\*\* Ah, but it has everything to do with it. **matt** is right - it _is_ unconscious, in that there is no overall guiding force determining which direction the market pushes society. It’s easy to show that those “millions of self-interested decisions” lead to externality problems, precisely because of the lack of an overall global decision-maker. “Millions of self-interested decisions” lead to pollution and labour law problems, because it isn’t worth the while of each self-interested decision-maker to do what is necessary to create the conditions necessary for the global optimal solution. If it is like an election, then it’s like one in which each voter realistically has to choose between two guys he doesn’t really like because the third that he does like has no chance of getting in. Only on a much bigger scale. The market is one tool of many available to a government - it is not and should not be the only one. * * * > [@](#): > > _Me, being facetious_ > > **the protesters don’t want to let any stinking bureaucrats decide how they need to make their protest known…** > [@](#): > > _sailor, taking the point on_ > > \*\*We have a system of laws which were enacted by the elected representatives of the people. What these people are doing is illegal. Are you trying to tell me it is OK to break the law when you see fit? Then I guess it is OK for the police to bust a few skulls. I’ll go for that. Give the police free rein and see who wins. > > If protestors want “global corporations” to respect the laws, the first thing they should do is respect the laws themselves.\*\* Yes, I know. Although I do note that they don’t want the corporations to obey existing laws - they want new laws that don’t let the corporations get away with what they get away with. But you should note that (a) As **matt** has been trying to say, the overwhelming majority of protesters want nothing to do with the violence (b) There is a _major_ difference between violence against property and violence against people. Even of the violent protesters, most tend to fall into the first category. The police are responding in many cases to violence against property with violence (often extreme violence) against people. I’m sorry, but I cannot condone this even though I would like to see the rioters locked up. FWIW, I feel that a debate about the protesters actions is getting away from the point of this debate, which was about “globalism” itself. It’s attacking the proponents instead of the philosophy. I think we should probably leave discussions of the protesters for another thread. pan ---
**Author:** ![China\_Guy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/779978/32.png) [@China\_Guy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/China_Guy)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2001, 9:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-free-trade/75391/30 "2001-08-14T09:26:24Z")
China appears to be using global free trade (okay, the first tentative steps called WTO) as part of a plan to enact badly needed domestic reforms. What might be political suicide by the leadership to try on their own just might be palatable if it’s part of the WTO. China is also a pretty good example of a fairly closed economy that’s opened up over the past 20 years. I myself have seen great changes since 1985. Now, you can sure make a value judgement about the pros and cons. Previously, every one starved together. Now, some people get rich, there’s a middle class greater than the population of the US, the great migrant movement from the impoverished country side funneled more money and therefore economic and political freedom than ever before in Chinese history, and some people still starve. You can also say whatever you want about the current state of human rights in China, but most observers would accept that human rights have been improving markedly since the economy first opened up. Free trade is not a zero sum game. The pie gets bigger rather than a redistribution of the same pie. The average Mr. Chen in China has come from a very low base and gotten a bigger piece of the pie. The average Joe in the US has come from a higher base and probably gotten a bigger piece of the pie. ---
**Author:** ![Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/e19adc/32.png) [@Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2001, 9:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-free-trade/75391/31 "2001-08-14T09:27:25Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by sailor \* > \*\*So, you are telling me this is a worldwide conspiracy against these peaceful demonstrators. Every country, every city they go, they have a problem. Yet plenty of other groups everywhere seem to make their points peacefully and without problems. > > And what’s wrong with CNN, Newsweek, The Washington Post, etc? Are you telling me the images are doctored? Are you telling me what I saw on TV never happened? > \*\* Hi Sailor. I’m a TV News producer, and I’m here to say there _is_ a worldwide conspiracy against those who peacefully demonstrate against free trade. It’s a largely unconscious, market-driven conspiracy, but it exists nevertheless. The problem started with a riot-- albeit a small one-- that happened in Seattle. I have friends who were protesting there, and I have co-workers who were teargassed. The agitators were the extreme minority in that crowd-- but it doesn’t take much to make the evening news. The people holding TV cameras rush to where the action is, and the people making decisions about what to air will generally choose the most exciting pieces of tape. Yes, there were thousands of peaceful, marching people at Seattle, and Quebec city, and Genoa. But they’re _boring_, so they’re only gonna make news for about 10 seconds or less-- one sentence to let you know how many people were there. Are images doctored? No, but they are framed and constructed to tell a particular story; the story of a violent demonstration. The _reasons_ for the violence don’t matter; the reasons for the demonstration get lost in the clutter; when tear gas, pepper spray, and bullets start flying, all that matters is that there _is_ violence. The pictures of violent behaviour that you see on CNN, Newsweek, and the Washington Post did actually happen-- but they ignore thousands of incidents of non-violent behaviour by protesters. ---
**Author:** ![Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/e19adc/32.png) [@Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2001, 9:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-free-trade/75391/32 "2001-08-14T09:36:22Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by sailor \* > \*\*So, you are telling me this is a worldwide conspiracy against these peaceful demonstrators. Every country, every city they go, they have a problem. Yet plenty of other groups everywhere seem to make their points peacefully and without problems. > > And what’s wrong with CNN, Newsweek, The Washington Post, etc? Are you telling me the images are doctored? Are you telling me what I saw on TV never happened? > \*\* > [@](#): > > \*[originally posted by \* > \*\*Gee, I wonder what incentive large corporations might have to discredit people protesting against their hegemony. \*\* I’m a TV News producer, and I’m here to say there _is_ a worldwide conspiracy against those who peacefully demonstrate against free trade. This conspiracy is entirely driven by individuals working in the news trade, and has absosmurfly nothing to do with large corporations. The problem started with a riot-- albeit a small one-- that happened in Seattle. I have friends who were protesting there, and I have co-workers operating cameras who were teargassed. The agitators were the extreme minority in that crowd-- but it doesn’t take much to make the evening news. The people holding TV cameras rush to where the action is, and the people making decisions about what to air will generally choose the most exciting pieces of tape. Yes, there were thousands of peaceful, marching people at Seattle, and Quebec city, and Genoa. But they’re _boring_, so they’re only gonna make news for about 10 seconds or less-- one sentence to let you know how many people were there. Are images doctored? No, but they are framed and constructed to tell a particular story; the story of a violent demonstration. The _reasons_ for the violence don’t matter; the reasons for the demonstration get lost in the clutter; when tear gas, pepper spray, and bullets start flying, all that matters is that there _is_ violence. The pictures of violent behaviour that you see on CNN, Newsweek, and the Washington Post did actually happen-- but they ignore thousands of incidents of non-violent behaviour by protesters. Likewise, the peaceful protesters aren’t ignored because ‘corporations’ want to discredit their views. I work for a national corporation, and no word has ever come down from on high saying ‘don’t cover that story, we don’t like their viewpoint.’ You have to remember that corporations themselves are composed of individuals. They’re also _owned_ by individual shareholders, for the most part. ---
**Author:** ![Odesio](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/odesio/32/20003_2.png) [@Odesio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Odesio)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2001, 9:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-free-trade/75391/33 "2001-08-14T09:36:38Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by kabbes \* > \*\* > > It’s easy to show that those “millions of self-interested decisions” lead to externality problems, precisely because of the lack of an overall global decision-maker. “Millions of self-interested decisions” lead to pollution and labour law problems, \*\* And what exactly are protestors saying should be done to change that? We already have laws in this country regarding pollution and labor as do many other nations. Are they protesting because the standards vary from nation to nation? I’m honestly trying to figure out just what exactly has their panties in a bunch. > [@](#): > > \*\* > (a) As **matt** has been trying to say, the overwhelming majority of protesters want nothing to do with the violence \*\* Crowd control is a very difficult thing to do. There have been cases where otherwise peaceful protestors were incited to rioting by a minority. It is difficult to weed out the violent protestors especially when they are sprinkled among the non-violent ones. I’m not excusing the police if they did abuse their power. But maybe we need to prod our police forces to provide better training to their officers when it comes to crowd control. > [@](#): > > \*\* > (b) There is a _major_ difference between violence against property and violence against people. Even of the violent protesters, most tend to fall into the first category. The police are responding in many cases to violence against property with violence (often extreme violence) against people. I’m sorry, but I cannot condone this even though I would like to see the rioters locked up. \*\* I see nothing wrong with using violence to stop people from destroying property. I’m not saying shooting them is a good idea but tear gas and clubs seem like reasonable thigns to use if the police wishes to stop them. If someone were stealing my car I’d find nothing morally incorrect about cracking them over the head to get them to stop. > [@](#): > > \*\* > FWIW, I feel that a debate about the protesters actions is getting away from the point of this debate, which was about “globalism” itself. It’s attacking the proponents instead of the philosophy. I think we should probably leave discussions of the protesters for another thread. > > pan \*\* What philosophy? There are many different reasons why people attack globalization. Marc ---
**Author:** ![Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/e19adc/32.png) [@Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2001, 9:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-free-trade/75391/34 "2001-08-14T09:38:19Z")
I guess an accidental doublepost means you all get to see the editing process in action. The second post is the final version. If a mod could wipe out that first post, I’d be much obliged. ---
**Author:** ![London\_Calling](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/49beb7/32.png) [@London\_Calling](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/London_Calling)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2001, 9:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-free-trade/75391/35 "2001-08-14T09:44:58Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by erislover \* > Er… what exactly is it if not socialized? I’m sorry, i’ve always felt that term applied to it almost perfectly. > > As far as being “anti free market” the only people who are truly supporting a free market are anarchists. Everyone else wants a regulated economy in some way, shape, or form. \*\* The point I was trying to make is that lending to ‘something’ a tag that creates a negative impression (amongst the impressionable) - whether that be Health Care, ‘Globalisation’ or the NY Yankees – influences the public perception of that ‘something’: Thus what is termed ‘socialised’ by the media or politicians might create a negative connotation in the US (Health Care), what is _not_ termed ‘socialised’ (Education) doesn’t, yet they are the same. By the same token, what is termed ‘anti free trade’ also creates a negative image (while also being a misnomer). So, Instead of informing a public debate, the media and politicians unduly influence the views of the less independent thinkers in society (by negative characterisation) in order to bolster their own agenda, which, in a democratic sense is simply not their role. I happen to think that, using the very opening of the OP as an example, the miss-characterisation of the issues by politicians and the media has, to some extent. succeeded. As for the rest of your comment, forgive me if I assume you’re playing semantic games until the point becomes clearer to me. ---
**Author:** ![kabbes](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/e99b99/32.png) [@kabbes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kabbes)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2001, 10:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-free-trade/75391/36 "2001-08-14T10:04:25Z")
**Marc** - > [@](#): > > **And what exactly are protestors saying should be done to change that? We already have laws in this country regarding pollution and labor as do many other nations. Are they protesting because the standards vary from nation to nation? I’m honestly trying to figure out just what exactly has their panties in a bunch.** Well for a start they’re saying that corporations shouldn’t take advantage of _other_ countries that _don’t_ have those laws. Anyway, you’re asking the wrong person. Frankly I’m not sure _what_ they believe - and I don’t think a lot of the protesters are too sure either. They do know however that a lot of power these days seems to rest in undemocratic hands and are not too happy about it. I just wanted to point out that **matt’s** statement was entirely reasonable and to argue against unfettered market fundamentalism. It isn’t unreasonable to assume that human ingenuity might direct affairs a little better than a force proven to provide non-optimal solutions in a number of situations. pan ---
**Author:** ![Odesio](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/odesio/32/20003_2.png) [@Odesio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Odesio)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2001, 10:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-free-trade/75391/37 "2001-08-14T10:14:36Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by kabbes \* > \*\*Well for a start they’re saying that corporations shouldn’t take advantage of _other_ countries that _don’t_ have those laws. \*\* That seems kind of silly. Why not allow those nations to make their own decisions? > [@](#): > > \*\* > Anyway, you’re asking the wrong person. Frankly I’m not sure _what_ they believe - and I don’t think a lot of the protesters are too sure either. They do know however that a lot of power these days seems to rest in undemocratic hands and are not too happy about it. \*\* There will always be power that rests in undemocratic hands. I can’t say I’m really bent out of shape about it. I am concerned about corporations buying politicans. > [@](#): > > \*\* > I just wanted to point out that **matt’s** statement was entirely reasonable and to argue against unfettered market fundamentalism. It isn’t unreasonable to assume that human ingenuity might direct affairs a little better than a force proven to provide non-optimal solutions in a number of situations. > > pan \*\* I don’t see an unfettered market. Marc ---
**Author:** ![kabbes](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/e99b99/32.png) [@kabbes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kabbes)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2001, 10:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-free-trade/75391/38 "2001-08-14T10:30:59Z")
No, but **sailor** essentially suggested one. I don’t only have to argue against the status quo you know - I can argue against other people in this thread! pan ---
**Author:** ![China\_Guy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/779978/32.png) [@China\_Guy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/China_Guy)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2001, 11:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-free-trade/75391/39 "2001-08-14T11:00:21Z")
[QUOTE] \*Originally posted by MGibson \* \*\* > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by kabbes \* > \*\*Well for a start they’re saying that corporations shouldn’t take advantage of _other_ countries that _don’t_ have those laws. \*\* That seems kind of silly. Why not allow those nations to make their own decisions? [quote] So what do you think of goods made by state sponsored slave labor in the Chinese gulag and exported to the US? ---
**Author:** ![Odesio](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/odesio/32/20003_2.png) [@Odesio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Odesio)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2001, 11:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-free-trade/75391/40 "2001-08-14T11:24:47Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by China Guy \* > \*\* > So what do you think of goods made by state sponsored slave labor in the Chinese gulag and exported to the US? \*\* I’m not exactly thrilled by the idea and I try to avoid buying products made in China. But China makes so many products and I admit I don’t always remember to check the labels. I really hope that open trading policies with China will continue to improve things for the people there. Perhaps in another generatino or two we’ll see the end of their oppressive government and the beginning of something better. Marc [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-free-trade/75391.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/global-free-trade/75391.md?page=3)